On Wednesday 11 August 2004 00:20, Richard Henderson wrote: > On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 06:30:28AM +0100, Richard Sandiford wrote: > > The whole thing's in a sequence that gets discarded if > > expand_doubleword_shift returns false. Isn't that enough? > > Missed that, sorry. > > Patch seems ok then. We'd have to add a new macro/target flag > to handle non-truncating shifts -- we've got cases: > > (1) Large shift shifts out all bits (ARM) ARM is actually shift count modulo 256 Paul
